grhkm21
grhkm21
By the way, is this intended? ```python sage: L = IntegralLattice(Matrix(QQ, [[1000, 0], [0, 1]])) ....: L.0.norm() 1 ```
Yeah that's what I was thinking, `v.parent()` gives the lattice
> > > By the way, is this intended? > > > ```python > > > sage: L = IntegralLattice(Matrix(QQ, [[1000, 0], [0, 1]])) > > > ....: L.0.norm() >...
For now, I will add change it to a `sorted` call, and if it breaks in any other architecture then ~~too bad~~ we can figure out from there, perhaps testing...
I'll sort it by the norm *and* the original vector then
To fix "TypeError: `Graph.is_matching_covered()` takes 1 positional argument but 2 were given", you can make the argument list of `is_matching_covered` be `def is_matching_covered(self, *_, **__):`. Also do you mind replacing...
> This PR would intuitively fit nice into their work but I felt uncomfortable with it returning an iterator. I felt like returning a single curve was more handy so...
Also I will have to look closer at the paper and the implementation, but why don't use you just use `EllipticCurve_with_order`? It seems to implement the same CM stuff based...
Hi, I'm ready to review this. As @vincentmacri mentioned, you implemented the algorithm incorrectly. I am able to get an algorithm working using $p^*$ instead of $p$ terms. I also...
This should definitely be viewed as an utility function rather than a constructor. I still don't see any valid argument for returning a curve rather than an iterator.